China’s South China Sea dominance is the price US pays for Iraq and Afghanistan
http://atimes.com/2015/06/chinas-south-china-sea-dominance-is-the-price-us-pays-for-iraq-and-afghanistan/
Chinas South China Sea dominance is the price US pays for Iraq and Afghanistan
By David P. Goldman on June 8, 2015
On todays front page, M.K. Bhadrakumar parses the press statements following US Defense Secretary Ashton Carters New Delhi visit, noting that the Americans spoke grandly of strategic convergence (against China) while Modi maintained a deliberate ambiguity about the nature of Indias defense relationship with the US. I will offer a prediction as to what will come of Chinas territorial assertions and Americas oppostion: China will get what it wants.
There wont be a war, because there is no practical way to have a war, even if the US wanted to take the matter to the point of military confrontation. A nervous pilot might loose a missile at his opposite number, to be sure, but even a live fire incident will not ignite a broader conflict. There is a simple reason to be so confident about the outcome: American aircraft carriers, for decades the source of Americas hegemony in East Asian waters, are now vulnerable to Chinese surface-to-ship missiles and diesel-electric submarines. There is a good deal of debate about the effectiveness of Chinas DF-21D carrier killer missile, which goes into space and heads straight down at its target, but the probabiity is that Chinese missile artillery can swamp a US carriers defenses. If missiles dont get it, the subs likely will: running on electric batteries, diesel eletric submarines are extremely quiet, and have sunk American carriers in NATO exercises in the past.
The US is working on countermeasures, to be sure, but chronic underinvestment in cutting-edge defense R&D has left them underdeveloped and under-deployed. The Bush administration spent $1 trillion or so in Iraq and Afghanistan, mainly on personnel, and reduced defense R&D to accommodate its nation-building ambitions in the region. That was a bad trade-off. The US has little to show for its efforts except the chaos that has enveloped the Levant and Mesopotamia after the collapse of the Iraqi state. China has had time to close the technology gap with the US, and neutralize if necessary Americas principle means of projecting power in the region.
Washington is not happy with Chinas territorial assertiveness in the South China Sea, nor should it be. The de facto seizure of the Spratly Islands humiliates American allies and violates norms of international good behavior. I am not happy about it. But there is no way to force China to stop, and no way to persuade it to stop.